Started By
Message

re: Lets Talk Politics

Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:26 pm to
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:26 pm to
quote:

I would argue someone who is permanently dependent on life support and people in persistant vegitative states are no longer "human" in a practical sense.
The specific example of PVS patients is also salient because at that point the "choice" of whether to keep them alive or let them die passes to the spouse or family.
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 4:27 pm
Posted by cardboardboxer
Member since Apr 2012
34353 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:26 pm to
quote:

The decision in Roe/Casey stands only so long as there are 5 votes in support on the court. A conservative replacement of Scalia, and one more conservative replacement of someone like Ginsburg, and that can change.


It could, but it won't. Not with John Roberts as Chief Justice, he is big on avoiding these sorts of cases that undo major precedents. Citizens United was a big exception and he disliked the fallout from that. Heck I wouldn't even count on him being on the conservative side of that vote going forward.

And even in the rare case he changes his mind or he is not longer steering the ship, that only applies to the Presidential Election (aka the person who can nominate justices). Yet we see year after year non-Presidential candidates running on either pro- or -anti abortion agendas even though they will barely have any say in how that issue plays out. It seems asinine to me.
Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46617 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:31 pm to
quote:

Well if you stab it through the mothers stomach at 14 weeks you go to jail for murdering a human


But if you cut it up and suck it out, well that's ok, it's just a growth and a choice



I make no excuses for our inconsistent judicial system. Why do black men go to jail nearly twice as long as white men for minor offenses? Why is porn legal but not prostitution?

We aren't a logical species.
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55670 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:32 pm to
I'm not attacking you Roger, please don't take it as such. But the point you used reagrding a fetus not being human since it cannot survive on its own just doesn't hold water. My aunt needs a pacemaker to live, is she less human? My mother needs chemo to stay alive, is she less human? A toddler dies without an adult to care for it, is it less human?
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55670 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:34 pm to
quote:

We aren't a logical species


Agreed


we are selfish bankrupt beings if left to our own devices
Posted by TbirdSpur2010
ALAMO CITY
Member since Dec 2010
134026 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:40 pm to
quote:

Why is porn legal but not prostitution?

We aren't a logical species.



Indeed.

And that porn/prostitution thing really bothers me. We make SUCH a big to-do over age of consent/consensual sex between consenting adults, but draw the line when money changes hands for the act? While making a living doing porn is perfectly legal?

Dafuq?
Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46617 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:42 pm to
I mean, we're biologically programmed to be selfish. Altruistic animals get eaten in the wild

We're the first species in history to value absolute selflessness and altruism. Even in apes and dolphins and other advanced mammals such traits only exist within groups.

Our entire existence of you think about it is designed to fight biology. Medicine, government, monogamy, generosity, education, etc. is all designed to keep our basic biology at bay. In our natural state, without restrictions, we'd eat each other. Literally.
Posted by Mirthomatic
Member since Feb 2013
4113 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:43 pm to
quote:

Quickening makes the most sense, at least until we know more about the neurological basis of consciousness.


It's tricky to try to describe some position as "making the most sense", because one has to question what determines the sensibility. If "humanity", or "personhood", is a moral designation, and not a scientific classification, then how can one moral framework make more sense than another?

I mean, we (nearly) all agree that all humans who have been born are persons with legal rights and moral standing. But that wasn't always the case in the U.S., and isn't universally the case world-wide even today.

As for using quickening as the standard, I'm not sure there would be a large portion of activists on either side who would support that. Pro-lifers would consider it too late by far, and pro-choicers would consider it too early by far.

My personal stance is that the individual begins at conception, so that's where I draw the line. But as far as public policy is concerned, the only solution that I think would ultimately satisfy most is for Roe/Casey to be reversed, and the decision returned to the states.
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:44 pm to
Also, I shamelessly stole this idea from someone on the Texags poliboard, but:

Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55670 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:46 pm to
We already know that we disagree on the cause and cure for those traits
Posted by Mirthomatic
Member since Feb 2013
4113 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:47 pm to
quote:



It's not an issue of value, it's an issue of viability. Yes, such adults are less viable and in a physiologic sense less "human" than you and me. I would argue someone who is permanently dependent on life support and people in persistant vegitativd states are no longer "human" in a practical sense. Losing the ability to utilize the frontal lobe is a pretty significant cutoff.


But the individual in the PVS is much less "viable" than a typical fetus, in that the "prognosis" for the fetus is far better.
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55670 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:48 pm to
No offense but that thing gives me a headache
Posted by TbirdSpur2010
ALAMO CITY
Member since Dec 2010
134026 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:51 pm to
That's actually pretty good.
Posted by Mirthomatic
Member since Feb 2013
4113 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 4:57 pm to
quote:


It could, but it won't. Not with John Roberts as Chief Justice, he is big on avoiding these sorts of cases that undo major precedents. Citizens United was a big exception and he disliked the fallout from that. Heck I wouldn't even count on him being on the conservative side of that vote going forward


Even putting Roberts on the "liberal" side, that just changes the math, which therefore only changes the timing. Suppose a President Cruz gets to replace Scalia (deceased at 79), Ginsburg (82), and Kennedy(79) or Breyer(77)? Add those three to Thomas/Alito, and you've got your reversals.

And this isn't even a far-fetched scenario. The next president is going to replace AT LEAST one, and has a very good shot at three if he/she gets two terms.

As for non-Presidential candidates, their opinion still matters re: abortion. Senators must affirm SCOTUS nominations. Even state legislators enact statutes that impose or remove restrictions on abortion. Just look at the Texas statute requiring abortion doctors have admitting privileges in a local hospital, and requires abortion clinics to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers.
Posted by Roger Klarvin
DFW
Member since Nov 2012
46617 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 5:01 pm to
That chart

I've actually described my economic views as free market Darwinism before, though I do believe in some regulations pertaining to monopolies and several other issues.
Posted by 3nOut
Central Texas, TX
Member since Jan 2013
29103 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:06 pm to
quote:

we are selfish bankrupt beings if left to our own devices


Which is why Klarvin needs Jesus.
Posted by greenbastard
Parts Unkown
Member since Feb 2014
2740 posts
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:50 pm to
quote:

Which is why Klarvin needs Jesus.

Dammit Klarvin! Mow your own damn lawn!
Posted by Old Sarge
Dean of Admissions, LSU
Member since Jan 2012
55670 posts
Posted on 2/26/16 at 7:09 am to
Why single out Klarvin? Everyone needs Jesus.
Posted by Cooter Davenport
Austin, TX
Member since Apr 2012
9006 posts
Posted on 2/26/16 at 8:11 am to
quote:

Poor minority women tend to be pressured into it. I've seen it first hand sadly. It is often presented as their only choice. And 70% of PP clinics are located in areas where blacks make up the largest single group.


The biggest advocates in the early days (Margaret Sanger for example) were outright racist eugenicists who advocated for abortion as a way to get rid of black people. It's got a really, really dark, disturbing, sick history. If they taught that in school people would have a MUCH different opinion.
This post was edited on 2/26/16 at 8:13 am
Posted by Iosh
Bureau of Interstellar Immigration
Member since Dec 2012
18941 posts
Posted on 2/26/16 at 10:58 am to
quote:

The biggest advocates in the early days (Margaret Sanger for example) were outright racist eugenicists who advocated for abortion as a way to get rid of black people.
This isn't true. Sanger is often quoted out-of-context as saying "we don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population" when the context of the letter makes it clear they didn't want that word to spread because it would be false.
This post was edited on 2/26/16 at 10:59 am
first pageprev pagePage 29 of 50Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter